On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 1:27 PM Yedidyah Bar David <d...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 8:31 PM Michal Skrivanek <mskri...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 15. 6. 2022, at 11:25, Yedidyah Bar David <d...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I was annoyed for some time now by the fact that when I used some
> > > github-CI-generated RPMs, with a git hash in their names, I could
> > > never find this git hash anywhere - not in my local git repo, nor in
> > > github. Why is it so?
> >
> > huh, I wondered about that same thing today....
> > Thank you for explaining why I couldn't find that hash anywhere
> >
> > > Because, if I got it right, the default for
> > > 'actions/checkout@v2' is to merge the PR HEAD with the branch HEAD.
> > > See e.g. [1]:
> > >
> > > HEAD is now at 7bbb40c9a Merge
> > > 026bb9c672bf46786dd6d16f4cbe0ecfa84c531d into
> > > 35e217936b5571e9657946b47333a563373047bb
> > >
> > > Meaning: my patch was 026bb9c, master was 35e2179, and the generated
> > > RPMs will have 7bbb40c9a, not to be found anywhere else. If you check
> > > the main PR page [3], you can find there '026bb9c', but not
> > > '7bbb40c9a'.
> > >
> > > (Even 026bb9c might require some effort, e.g. "didib force-pushed the
> > > add-hook-log-console branch 2 times, most recently from c90e658 to
> > > 66ebc88 yesterday". I guess this is the result of github discouraging
> > > force-pushes, in direct opposite of gerrit, which had a notion of
> > > different patchsets for a single change. I already ranted about this
> > > in the past, but that's not the subject of the current message).
> >
> > We should create ovirt-github-ra...@ovirt.org, I'd certainly contribute:-)
> > It's amazing how horrible _and_ popular github is.
> >
> > >
> > > This is not just an annoyance, it's a real difference in semantics. In
> > > gerrit/jenkins days, IIRC most/all projects I worked on, ran CI
> > > testing/building on the pushed HEAD, and didn't touch it. Rebase, if
> > > at all, happened either explicitly, or at merge time.
> > >
> > > actions/checkout's default, to auto-merge, is probably meant to be
> > > more "careful" - to test what would happen if the code is merged. I
> > > agree this makes sense. But I personally think it's almost always ok
> > > to test on the pushed HEAD and not rebase/merge _implicitely_.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > It should be easy to change, using [2]:
> > >
> > > - uses: actions/checkout@v2
> > > with:
> > > ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}
> > >
> > > No need to reach a complete consensus - can be decided upon
> > > per-project/repo.
> >
> > github is always quite horrible to maintain some consistency across
> > projects...yeah, I'd really like to have the same approach for every single
> > project, it simplifies the maintenace....we do have a lot of projects and
> > many are not very active and they easily fall behind. After all we have 160
> > projects in oVirt org but only ~30 are active....or rather 30 are in use
> > for oVirt compose and ~10 are active.
> >
> > +1 on using it everywhere
> > we have our own action for rpms and buildcontainer for unified build
> > environment (with a shameful exception of vdsm!)....it's probably overkill
> > for checkout to use oVirt's action
> >
> > > But if you disagree, I'd like to understand why.
>
> If someone _wants_ the current behavior (merge to HEAD) but is just
> annoyed by the commit hash, an alternative is to use the PR hash in
> the name. Now tried this POC, seems to work:
>
> https://github.com/oVirt/otopi/pull/23
Also this one. Much simpler, but perhaps we still want the refactoring of ^^.
https://github.com/oVirt/otopi/pull/24
>
> Best regards,
>
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/runs/6881311961?check_suite_focus=true
> > >
> > > [2]
> > > https://github.com/marketplace/actions/checkout?version=v2.4.2#checkout-pull-request-head-commit-instead-of-merge-commit
> > >
> > > [3] https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/pull/249
> > > --
> > > Didi
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Devel mailing list -- devel@ovirt.org
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@ovirt.org
> > > Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
> > > oVirt Code of Conduct:
> > > https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
> > > List Archives:
> > > https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/7SEFKOASOATTMO2NK2SBWMOV4CV6LZOS/
> >
>
>
> --
> Didi
--
Didi
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- devel@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct:
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives:
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/GZP4XZNYYEO2H263WCD4B3DAQHFOJUUC/
